DukeIronHand

My understanding has always been that the great French ace has no known burial place. Have to do some more checking - a wiki is hardly the last word - since (I think) anyone can add or change things(?).

I just purchased a TrackIR 5. In fact, I just installed it this morning. Install is a no-brainer and the thing works great with OFF using the "default" profile. Just gotta try it now with IL-2 and SF2-V. I am running Windows XP w/ SP3.

"Yes Set Auto Exit Mission to off in workshops. You will now remain in the seat until you are dead - before you would exit OFF on excessive craft damage..." This is from my cut n paste tweaks file where I save bits of forum wisdom. The above tip is not mine.

Guess my SA problems are finally going to be a thing of the past. Not really sure why I waited so long. I have this odd thing where I feel guilty spending money on things that are not critical - even though I have plenty. I wear old clothes and drive old cars - as long as they work why replace them? Drives the wife crazy but as a woman shes already halfway there. After watching OFF flight videos, with TrackIR in action, I now have mentally made it a critical item. Even paid for 2-day shipping...

Whoop! Just got an e-mail that it shipped - and I have the weekend (except for honey-do's) off. Gotta love the UPS tracking system that will tell you exactly where your package is 24/7. Even when on a truck and where/when. Thank you gentleman - you have me stoked.

Just a heads up if anyone needs a copy (or another) of CFS3. Both of the Staples stores in my area (SE Michigan) are selling copies of CFS3 for $9.99. Dunno if this is a nation-wide thing but if you need one it might be worth a check.

Guess a moderator fixed the title for me. Thanks!

Sorry for the confusing thread title - I typed too quickly. Should be "FYI - If you need a copy of CFS3" Guess you can't edit so long after you post...or I missed the button.

Thanks for your work and effort on this Creaghorn - looking forward to giving it a try!

Possible tip for those having difficulty running OFF. My OFF install was acting poorly - mainly failing to load missions or taking forever to do so. There were other little things also but you get the idea. Decided on a total re-install of CFS3 and then OFF. Once CFS3 was installed I decided to fire it up and fly a mission or two never really having owned it till OFF. Now my CP has more than enough horsepower to run CFS3 but I found it ran like crap - freezes, pauses, graphic distortions, etc. Playing with the settings (mainly the "Safest" graphic settings) finally got it to run well. Oh...and my hat switch works just fine in CFS3...wanted to test that out also. I guess my point is it would make sense that if your CP cannot run CFS3 well (for whatever reason) it will probably have problems with OFF as well? Thats my original thought of the day so I would say if you are having quirky OFF problems make sure that you can run CFS3 well before you think its the OFF program itself. The use of the CFS3 engine (a poor one IMHO) is the subject for another topic.

Ditto. I have no problems with the current HitR distribution method.

I've asked this question, in different formats, in a couple other threads but I guess the Devs don't like my aftershave - or I am not understanding the answer if it is being given. Olham gave an answer in one but - I think - he was just guessing. If you weren't old chap I apologize. When I fire up a campaign mission after 1916, using the Historical AI setting, there is a "random call" made by the OFF Manager that determines which AI will be used - either pre-HitR AI ("Agressive") or the HitR AI. My question: Is it a 50/50 chance for either AI? Does the chance for either vary by the month or year (1917 or 1918)?

As of right this moment I like the HitR AI as it flies and fights just fine for me but, after more campaign flying, I may want to go "Historical". I just wanted to know that it wasn't pulled out of someones arse and there is a logic to it. The HitR AI makes for "realistic" feeling encounters so far in QC but I have not tried it in a campaign yet.

Thanks Winder - exactly the answer I was looking for.

Well, the word "random" was used in the patch release notes. But I get it now - thanks.

Very cool. Thanks... One learns much by these projects (especially with photos) as they try to use, as much as possible, original techniques and material types. I was thinking "What a cool job!" then noted in the documentation that most are volunteers. Still be neat though!

IIRC, on my own order, the tracking info -normally dead accurate for other companies - was way off on Avsngates delivery. I don't think its status changed till the day before delivery when obviously it had already been mailed days previously.

If I start a campaign mission in, lets say June 1917, what are my chances of having either AI? Is it 50%/50%?

I have absolutely nothing to back it up but somehow, in historical terms, I feel this must be true, i.e., taking off on a war patrol with full tanks. OFF fuel consumption rates/engine power, campaign engine and mission assignment aside. Be an interesting research project.

Being curious how come? I wasn't there of course to see all the nuances of the AL flight but it sounds like the Spads flew like I would have in their shoes - it would appear anyway like they were "booming and zooming."

Looks damning...except BE2's used to fly missions of 3 to 4 hours per "Wind in the Wires" so 50% after 1.5 hours may not be "unrealistic". Dunno about tank sizes or rate of consumption on either AC though. Perhaps the weight of the fuel is being over-modeled? It certainly would appear there is a problem of some sort based on Bulletheads "test"? EDIT: "The Fee will not come close to its real life ceiling with anything over about 40% fuel." Upon further reflection, knowing how manufacturers and historians do AC performance stats, this may not be "unrealistic" either. Weight was crictical for max alt on these AC IIRC.

Reference the performance of the Spads (which sounds pretty good) what AI were you using?

Got it - thanks for the Teams continued efforts. Question about the "Historical AI" setting. How exactly is the random element implemented and is it adjustable? I am a fan of the HitR AI but don't mind some surprises once in a while.

In my series of QC's it did appear the opposing AI had no problem dealing with my wingmen - us in Alb DIII's vs DH2's - unless my boys disengaged during combat - I did have several moments of chasing the enemy off their tails. I never saw one actually shot down but that does not mean it didn't happen. I didn't use the "Wingman Attack" key and that may be/could be a reason. As time allows I will experiment some more and try to be more observant.

I agree. Just returned from a series of 5 quick combats - 4 early Alb DIII's vs 4 DH2's. It may be too soon to really say but as of right now I like the "new AI" just fine. It does have a (here comes that word again) "realistic feel" to it. The enemy AI flew just fine and were plenty aggressive but not stupidly so, damaging me and certainly handling all my wingman - unless they disengaged as they were all gone after a short while. Until now my biggest (and only) OFF complaint, now that I have the view system figured out, was the AI but ...again it may be too soon to say in concrete...I really like the AI and would not change a thing. Superb job OFF Team!